[Is echography an adequate method for assessing the thickness of intra-abdominal fat? A comparison with computed tomography].
OBJECTIVE
The methods to measure intraabdominal fat amount and to distinguish visceral from subcutaneous fat are useful and needed because visceral obese people are at risk of developing cardiovascular disorders. We investigated US capabilities in measuring intraabdominal fat thickness and distribution distinguishing visceral from subcutaneous fat. The results were compared with those obtained with CT, the gold standard, and with the waist-hip ratio (W/H).


METHODS
Thirty obese women admitted to the Internal Medicine I Department, Ospedale S. Raffaele (Milan, Italy) were examined. The patients, aged 18-60 years and with BMI ranging 29.0-47.3, were submitted to consecutive double blind measurements with US and CT. The following anthropometric values were compared for every patient: W/H, US visceral/subcutaneous thickness, CT visceral/subcutaneous thickness, CT visceral area, CT subcutaneous adipose area and CT visceral/subcutaneous adipose area.


RESULTS
The classification of visceral obesity by W/H (> .85) was confirmed by CT visceral/subcutaneous adipose area (> .491). The W/H correlated significantly with CT visceral/subcutaneous adipose thickness and CT visceral/subcutaneous adipose area (r = .52, p < .004; r = .51, p < .004), but not with US visceral/subcutaneous adipose thickness (r = .42, p < .06). Significant correlations were found between Ct visceral/subcutaneous adipose area and with both US and CT visceral/subcutaneous adipose thickness (r = .59, p < .006; = .71, p < .0001). A high correlation was found between US visceral/subcutaneous adipose thickness and CT visceral/subcutaneous adipose thickness (r = .96, p < .0001).


CONCLUSIONS
Analyzing the results of the different methods, we conclude that US can always be used to study abdominal fat amount and distribution in obese women because this method exhibits significant correlations with CT, the gold standard. The W/H is not sufficient to distinguish visceral from subcutaneous intraabdominal fat.
Cucchi
E
E
Radiologia Diagnostica, Cattedra di Clinica Medica I, IRCCS, Ospedale. S. Raffaele, Milano.
Piatti
P M
PM
Orena
C
C
Pontiroli
A E
AE
Martino
E
E
Paesano
P L
PL
Pozza
G
G
Del Maschio
A
A
D000005:Abdomen / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D000273:Adipose Tissue / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D015992:Body Mass Index; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D009765:Obesity / Q000175:diagnosis; D011860:Radiography, Abdominal / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D014463:Ultrasonography / Q000379:methods / Q000706:statistics & numerical data
L'ecografia è una metodica adeguata per la valutazione dello spessore del grasso intraaddominale? Confronto con la Tomografia Computerizzata.